Reference for Gittin 42:17

כתבו על חרס של עציץ נקוב כשר דשקיל ליה ויהיב ליה ניהלה על עלה של עציץ נקוב אביי אמר כשר ורבא אמר פסול אביי אמר כשר

NOR ON DIFTERA,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A kind of skin. V. infra 22a. ');">¹²</span> BECAUSE WRITING ON IT CAN BE ALTERED [WITHOUT BEING NOTICEABLE]. THE SAGES, HOWEVER, DECLARE SUCH A GET VALID. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. IF IT IS WRITTEN ON SOMETHING ATTACHED TO THE SOIL. Does not the Mishnah say just before this that it must not be so written? — Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: It may be so written if a place is left blank for the substantive part.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment','[H] Viz., the names and the date, v. B.M. (Sonc. ed.) p. 35, n. 4. ');">¹³</span> The same statement was made by R. Eleazar in the name of R. Oshiah: It may [be so written] if a place is left blank for the substantive part. The same statement was also made by Rabbah b. Bar Hanah in the name of R. Johanan: It may [be so written] if a place is left blank for the substantive part. And [our Mishnah] follows R. Eleazar, who says that it is the witnesses to delivery who [make the Get] effective, and it is to be interpreted as follows: 'The formal<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] [G], v. B.M. (Sonc. ed.), p. 35, n. 3. ');">¹⁴</span> part [of the Get] must not be written [on something attached to the soil] lest one should come to write thereon the substantive part also. If, however, the formal part was written [on something still attached to the soil] and then detached and the substantive part was then filled in and [the Get] given to her, it is valid.' Resh Lakish, however, said: Our Mishnah says distinctly, AND SIGNED'. [This shows that] it follows the view of R. Meir who said that the signatures of the witnesses make [the Get] effective, and it is to be interpreted as follows: 'The substantive part must not be written [on something still attached to the soil] for fear lest the signatures should also be affixed to it [while in that state]. If, however, the substantive part was so written, and the Get was then detached and signed and given to her, it is valid.' If it is written on the surface of an earthenware flowerpot with a hole at the bottom<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which might therefore be regarded as still attached to the soil. ');">¹⁵</span> it is valid, because he can take the pot and give it to her.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And there is in fact no detaching from the soil. ');">¹⁶</span> If it is written on a leaf inside a flowerpot with a hole at the bottom, Abaye says it is valid and Raba says it is not valid. Abaye says it is valid

Explore reference for Gittin 42:17. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.